Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Response to Comments

More documents

Recommendations

Info

PRC Section 21083.2 governs the treatment of unique archaeological resources, which must be afforded consideration in the assessment of impacts under CEQA. A unique archaeological resource is defined as “an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated” as meeting any of the following criteria: 1. Contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information; 2. Has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best example of its type; or 3. Is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person. As defined by the California State Health and Safety Code, Section 7050.5, and PRC Section 5097.98, the inadvertent discovery of human remains requires cessation of project work relative to the find until an assessment of the remains, including determination of origin and deposition, is completed by the County Coroner, in consultation with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) and/or appropriate Tribal representative(s). In the event of inadvertent discoveries, an on-going program of Native American consultation provides an opportunity for such groups to participate in the identification, evaluation, and mitigation of impacts to human remains and funerary objects. When a project will affect state-owned historical resources, as described in PRC Section 5024, and the lead agency is a state agency, the lead agency will consult with the California State Historic Preservation Officer prior to approval of a proposed project (14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] Section 15064.5(b)(5)). EXECUTIVE ORDER W-26-92 Executive Order W-26-92 requires all state agencies, including Parks, in furtherance of the purposes and policies of the state’s environmental protection laws and historic resource preservation laws, to the extent prudent and feasible within existing budget and personnel resources, to preserve and maintain the significant heritage (cultural and historical) resources of the state. Each state agency, including Parks, is directed to: 1. Administer the cultural and historic properties under its control in a spirit of stewardship and trusteeship for future generations; 2. Initiate measures necessary to direct its policies, plans, and programs in such a way that state-owned sites, structures, and objects of historical, architectural, or archaeological significance are preserved, restored, and maintained for the inspiration and benefit of the people; 3. Ensure the protection of significant heritage resources are given full consideration in all of its land use and capital outlay decisions; and 4. Institute procedures to ensure that state plans and programs that contribute to the preservation and enhancement of significant non-state owned heritage Asian Clam Control Project IS/MND Emerald Bay State Park California Department of Parks and Recreation 40
esources in consultation with the Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) (Executive Order W-26-92 Section 1). WOULD THE PROJECT: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource, pursuant to §15064.5? c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? DISCUSSION LESS THAN POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH SIGNIFICANT NO IMPACT MITIGATION IMPACT IMPACT a-c) The proposed project would lay rubber blankets over the substrate of the mouth of Emerald Bay, which would be secured in place with rebar. These barriers would be a temporary blanket over the lake bottom and there are no known cultural resources in the project area. Alternative treatment methods such as freezing clams in place or suction removal of clams from the substrate may also be employed in small scale areas and to supplement benthic barrier effectiveness. Due to the nature and location of project activities, it is anticipated that there will be no impacts to historical or archaeological resources, and no human remains will be disturbed. Asian Clam Control Project IS/MND Emerald Bay State Park California Department of Parks and Recreation 41
Page 1 and 2:
FINAL MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATIO
Page 3 and 4:
2009. Initial surveys estimated thi
Page 5 and 6:
Emerald Bay will require traffic co
Page 7 and 8:
7 Asian Clam Control Project Final
Page 9 and 10:
9 Asian Clam Control Project Final
Page 11 and 12:
LAHONTAN REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CON
Page 13 and 14:
the infestation is 600 feet. The ba
Page 15 and 16: 15 Asian Clam Control Project Final
Page 21 and 22: More detail on the range of lake bo
Page 23 and 24: The MND states that there will be n
Page 25 and 26: arriers have not been secured with
Page 27 and 28: INITIAL STUDY MITIGATED NEGATIVE DE
Page 29 and 30: Pursuant to Section 21082.1 of the
Page 31 and 32: CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 INTRODUC
Page 33 and 34: This chapter provides a list of tho
Page 35 and 36: The invasion and establishment of A
Page 37 and 38: the edges of the rubber sheets for
Page 39 and 40: 2.10 DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS DPR re
Page 41 and 42: 1. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALL
Page 43 and 44: and receives approval from the Cali
Page 45 and 46: DISCUSSION a-e) As noted in the Env
Page 47 and 48: for six criteria pollutants after t
Page 49 and 50: IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. ENVIRONME
Page 51 and 52: Water Plant Community are not expec
Page 53 and 54: (Helisoma newberryi) creeks. Lake T
Page 55 and 56: mouth of Emerald Bay. Creating nois
Page 57 and 58: ecosystems as wetlands, meadows, an
Page 59 and 60: V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. ENVIRONMENTA
Page 61 and 62: and prolonged droughts (Lindström
Page 63 and 64: Roads expanded and upgraded the roa
Page 65: CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY AC
Page 69 and 70: Liquefaction and Landslide Hazards
Page 71 and 72: would not increase as a result of t
Page 73 and 74: • Carbon Dioxide - The natural pr
Page 75 and 76: VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIA
Page 77 and 78: emergencies and activities would al
Page 79 and 80: WOULD THE PROJECT: a) Violate any w
Page 81 and 82: Mitigation Measure Hydro-1: Water Q
Page 83 and 84: DISCUSSION a) The proposed project
Page 85 and 86: XII. NOISE. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING T
Page 87 and 88: DISCUSSION a) Project activities re
Page 89 and 90: DISCUSSION a-c) The project does no
Page 91 and 92: WOULD THE PROJECT: a) Result in sig
Page 93 and 94: implemented to inform the public, s
Page 95 and 96: D E F convenience decreasing as den
Page 97 and 98: c) This project will not will not i
Page 99 and 100: significant environmental effects?
Page 101 and 102: d) Most project-related environment
Page 103 and 104: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS No project
Page 105 and 106: CHAPTER 6 REFERENCES Chapter 2 Univ
Page 107 and 108: Cultural Resources Barrett, S. A.,
Page 109 and 110: Murphy and C.M. Knopp. Report prepa
Page 111 and 112: Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRP
Page 113 and 114: Report Preparation CALIFORNIA DEPAR
Page 115 and 116: APPENDIX B SENSITIVE SPECIES LIST _
Page 117 and 118:
Martes pennanti o fisher (C) Plants
Page 119 and 120:
If a Federal agency is involved wit
Page 121 and 122:
APPENDIX C ACRONYMS _______________
show all

Final Mitigated Negative Declaration and Response to Comments

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?